Third-Generation iPod Touch Teardown Reveals 802.11n-Capable Wi-Fi Chip

[InkMaster]

I love how people think N matters. I doubt most people have internet that is even near the max of wireless g, and even if you did you touch won't process web pages any faster. The device is a limitation, not the internet speed

err... as hard as this may be to believe, sometimes you also transfer files from computer to computer within your own network...

and yes, when transferring a few gigs via wifi, I would much rather wait for a couple of minutes on N then for hours on G...

 

[emulator]

Then why not put it into their flagship and highest revenue making device, the iPhone 3GS?

Why are you surprised? the 3GS could have been designed 6 months or more earlier (phones need much longer approval time). Also, last years ipod was faster than the 3G.

besides, the 'n' is not even activated so do us a favour: stop whining and enjoy your phone.

 

[bjett92]

Of course I am still wondering why the Mighty Mouse has a speaker in it.

The Mighty Mouse has audio feedback. Try pressing the side buttons without plugging in the mouse and then press them with the mouse plugged in. Same with rolling the scroll ball.

 

[Vandam500]

Why are you surprised? the 3GS could have been designed 6 months or more earlier (phones need much longer approval time). Also, last years ipod was faster than the 3G.

besides, the 'n' is not even activated so do us a favour: stop whining and enjoy your phone.

I know about the phone approval time and I am not whining, I am just stating some opinions that I am sure I'm not the only with them.

By the way, I have a Wireless N router and would of loved for the 3GS to have the Wifi chip like the new Touch even if it would get activated on a future firmware update. But guess what, when that firmware comes out and activates the Wireless N for the Touch, us 3GS people aren't going to be able to enjoy it. What would we have to do to get Wireless N? Buy the next iPhone that does have it... that's why I am angry.

 

[pmjoe]

any word if there is an empty space where a camera was supposed to be? the one that was removed 2 weeks ago due to manufacturing problems?

There is no way the device's hardware changed that significantly, they had time to test the new design, make all the production changes and time to produce thousands so that they're already shipping ... in the past 2 weeks.

 

[coasterswim]

err... as hard as this may be to believe, sometimes you also transfer files from computer to computer within your own network...

and yes, when transferring a few gigs via wifi, I would much rather wait for a couple of minutes on N then for hours on G...

Where is this "transfer gigs of files via Wi-Fi from your computer to your iPhone" feature that Apple currently allows?

 

[Inkling]

I agree with others. It looks like the latest touch has at least the potential to become a gadget I'd want to buy:

1. WiFi N. Why? Speed isn't the issue. Because at home I could make my network N-only and make security a bit tighter. I'd also be ready when b/g becomes rarer.

2. FM transmit. Like others, I don't want to klutz with some external gadget to play through speakers. If the chip can do it, why not do it?

3. FM receive. Less a big deal, but not a bad idea.

5. Microphone. For VoIP and voice notes on the go. Without it, even a used 1-G iPhone makes more sense.

6. A decent camera with still and video photography. Again, handy for notes on the go and times when I didn't know I needed a camera. If space is an issue, make the touch thicker and put a bigger battery in most of that space. No one complains about the iPhone being too thick, they won't mind a less thin touch, particularly with double the battery life.

As it stands now, buying the new touch makes little sense. I can get the same features in a used touch for less and more features in a used 1-g iPhone, also for less. That's particularly true of the low-end touch, which ships without the remote earphones with mike. That makes it's real price $230.

Apple should quit being so secretive. If the current models are merely interim to fill in until the real 3-G touches come along, they should say so and give us dates.

 

[Shake 'n' Bake]

Looks intriguing.

I fully expected 802.11n right out of the box with this version. Camera would have been nice, too.

Well it seems a camera could fit. Maybe one's coming mid-cycle? FM tuner/transmitter would be really nice.

802.11n will probably roll around with iPhone OS 3.1.2 or so.

 

[*LTD*]

It helps you deal with life to pigeonhole criticism as trolling, it's pretty pathetic. What insufferable arrogance. What were your Apple sales last year ?

Do you think anyone gives a sweet damn that you sell Macs? Do you think that actually matters around here? It doesn't give you any more credibility when all you do around here is troll. And to top it all off, you're usually way out of touch with what's going on in the industry, despite you being an alleged Apple distributor/vendor.

And your "criticism" was hardly that. It was just more one-liner trolling. As usual. That's your calibre.

With the new Nano, watch Flip and Creative's marketshare in this segment take a huge dive. It's all but guaranteed. And really, it would come as no surprise. All Apple had to do was add a competitive videocamera to the Nano and ease of uploading to Youtube and such, and the thin form factor, great look, multimedia package, and larger screen will take it the rest of the way. It's a no-brainer.

 

[JeffDM]

last i heard N is still not a final spec. once it's final Apple will be able to write drivers for it that will work with a variety of access points

They offer 'n' in their notebooks, so why stop now?

Probably. It's worthless. Seriously.

It's actually pretty nice for the size and price, the biggest problem is the rolling shutter.

There's no way they would charge for an update to activate the "N" functionality.

Then again, as a first gen iTouch owner that's paid for two OS upgrades I'm not sure why I'd think that...

Apple had a paid "n" driver update for their MacBooks, why do you think they won't do it for the Touch?

I love how people think N matters. I doubt most people have internet that is even near the max of wireless g, and even if you did you touch won't process web pages any faster. The device is a limitation, not the internet speed

So longer range and better reception through and around obstacles aren't interesting benefits?

 

[zonesey]

well ima say woot woot when they actually bring mimo support with multiple antennae to the iphone

 

[zedsdead]

Based on this news, the prototype and the production mishap, it is very clear that Apple fully intended to include a video camera (but not a still) in the iPod Touch.

I imagine an update will happen in the relative near future. Apple would love to be able to market that before Christmas rather than after.

 

[deconstruct60]

Wow, that gets me pretty mad. Why? I have a 3GS and the Wifi chip doesn't support Wireless N. Why am I mad? An iPod Touch 3rd Gen owner pays $299 or $399 and that's it, no monthly fees. An iPhone 3GS owner pays $200 or $300 (I paid $430 btw) plus a steep monthly fee (2 years) which of course Apple gets a % of. Without a doubt 3GS owners are paying Apple minimum $500 dollars for the device and yet there are more advanced parts in a iPod Touch which they make less money off? Wow, just wow.

Not sure why you'd be mad. The Touch has always gotten the "newer/faster" hardware first. The pre-3G phones lagged behind the Touch in processing power. The GS now lags in WiFi and probably processing power also. It was only temporary that the 3GS leapfrogged over the Touch. It was going to get leaped over when the Touch came. ( 0.6-0.7 ounces heavier and 0.15 inches "deeper" isn't that much difference in costs. )


The power (CPU/Graphics/etc.) goes Touch first and then iPhone second.
It is the "phone" aspect that slaps a large price premium on the phone. Celluar data networks a more ubiquitous than WiFi ones. For that privilege you pay more money.

If Apple would just let the Touch have as much internal volume as the Phone it would always top the Phone on the "more horsepower" front. Instead get the thinner for no reasonable reason (from consumer point of view) and throttling of the Touch as an offering. [ e.g., slightly more volume likely would have been room for exact same camera as 3GS. ]

 

[twoodcc]

now this is great! now if only apple enables 802.11n, then the new touch would be worth upgrading to!

 

[NT1440]

What a coincidence, the wireless N spec has just been finalized.

Vandamn, just so you know, Apple hasn't gotten anything from monthly subscriptions since the first iphone....

 

[aznkid25]

IEEE stamps 'approved' on 802.11n Wi-Fi standard

It looks like the Wireless N requirement has been approved by the IEEE.

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9137918/IEEE_stamps_approved_on_802.11n_Wi_Fi_standard

So only the 3rd generation ipod touch will have wireless N? What about the 2nd generation ipod touch? Is there a different wireless chip?

 

[SpinThis!]

I could make my network N-only and make security a bit tighter.

How does making your network N only make "security tighter?" 802.11n isn't any more "secure" than other flavors using, say, WPA2 encryption. If a hacker wants to hack your network, they're going to do it no matter what flavor of wifi you have and whatever band you have (2.4 or 5 ghz). If you're worried about neighbors or passerbys not using N so you're "invisible" you're talking about security by obscurity—which is hardly much of a reason to upgrade... along the same lines of people who think turning off SSID broadcast makes them safer.

Apple should quit being so secretive.... they should say so and give us dates.

What do you want, a roadmap so Apple can tell everyone else when they're going to release new stuff? Great business plan...

 

[zonesey]

They offer it in their notebooks, so why stop now?



It's actually pretty nice, aside from the rolling shutter.




Apple had a paid "n" driver update for their MacBooks, why do you think they won't do it?



So longer range and better reception through and around obstacles aren't interesting benefits?

The truth is that in order to benefit from this kind of a MISO or MIMO system, the basestation transmitter has to be N-capable, meaning that it has to have more than one antenna with which to transmit. With clever planning, the reliability and the coverage of the link can be increased (without using any more band than before!). The catch is that you gotta have more than just 1 transmit antenna. So, for single antenna systems, N isn't really helping that much... Glad I got my D-Link with 3 antennas shoving bits into the channel at almost 60 Mbps....

 

[archi17]

Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7C145 Safari/528.16)

Apple will definately charge for it in the 4.0 update. Why would Apple release it with extra features when they can milk their customers more later on?

 

[deconstruct60]

Based on this news and the production mishap, it is very clear that Apple fully intended to include a video camera (but not a still) in the iPod Touch..

But you'd get backlash if it doesn't do stills and substantially worse stills even if can hack a still out of the video camera. (would be similar to if the screen on the Touch was not quite as good as the iPhone. )


The nano's suspect (in terms of current mini vid cameras) records is "great" for the nano because it is 'extra'. Just a freebie thrown on so if catch between spending on a Flip and a iPod ... will get the iPod. As a Touch, the offereing would be priced higher than a Flip.

Also just because there is postage stamp area for the camera die doesn't mean it would have fit. still would have go get connectors back to the rest of the system. Some that works better in a mock up but not quite as well when physically cram everything in.

 

[droz]

Based on this news, the prototype and the production mishap, it is very clear that Apple fully intended to include a video camera (but not a still) in the iPod Touch.

I imagine an update will happen in the relative near future. Apple would love to be able to market that before Christmas rather than after.

Not going to happen. At this point Apple would have to eat serious crow to put a camera into the touch before 2010. Not to mention the consumers they would piss off that had bought the new one without the camera. Nope, I'd say end of 1Q10 at the earliest.

 

[Prenvo]

...give ya a nice new piece of hardware, and then totally not let you use it, or charge you more later on to use it.

LAME. If I could build a hackintosh phone, I would.

Or give you no new hardware and, uh, yeah. :/

 

[tabasco70]

were is the camera?

Wish there was one. Maybe next year.

 

[Jimmy James]

.

 

[SeaFox]

Update: iFixit has also revealed that there is a small empty space at the top of the device (approximately 6 mm x 6 mm x 3 mm) where an iPod nano-style camera could fit. The iPod touch does not appear to be thick enough to adequately house an autofocus camera as found in the iPhone 3GS.

Ha!

All that whining by you people for nothing! Even if they had included the camera, it would have been the nano's VGA resolution video-only camera, not the iPhone's camera, and you all would have been complaining because you couldn't take still pics with it.